Premium
This is an archive article published on December 4, 2014

State probing Centre’s decision on gas pricing is absurd: Reliance Industries Limited to High Court

UPA ministers M Veerappa Moily and Murli Deora, RIL Chairman Mukesh Ambani and others were named in the FIR.

Mukesh Ambani Mukesh Ambani

The Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL) on Thursday told the Delhi High Court that the Delhi government’s decision to probe the Centre’s policy on gas pricing was a “peculiar” and “absurd” situation.

The submission was made before Justice V K Shali by senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi who appeared for RIL which has challenged the then Arvind Kejriwal-led Delhi government’s decision to lodge an

FIR relating to alleged irregularities in raising the price of gas from the company’s KG6 basin.

Story continues below this ad

UPA ministers M Veerappa Moily and Murli Deora, RIL Chairman Mukesh Ambani and others were named in the FIR.

Delhi government had also alleged that the UPA government “favoured” RIL with an eye on the 2014 general elections and BJP maintained “silence” hoping to gain corporate funding for the polls. The charges have been denied by RIL and others.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the persons on whose complaint the FIR was lodged, had said the July 23, 2014, the notification on the powers of the Anti-Corruption Branch (ACB) amounted to diluting its powers.

The July 23 notification has limited the ACB’s powers to probe graft cases to the extent that it can investigate only city government officials and not those of the Centre.

Story continues below this ad

The notification was violative of the Criminal Procedure Code, Bhushan said and added the Centre did not have the power to issue the same with respect to ACB.

Delhi government, on its part, opposed RIL’s submission saying it was only investigating a criminal complaint and central government officials may come in the sweep of its probe.

The Centre, meanwhile, said it is still awaiting instructions on whether the notification will have prospective effect.

After hearing the brief arguments, the court listed the matter for further hearing on January 21, 2015.

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement
Loading Taboola...
Advertisement